Editorial: Connecticut's political influence peddling more insidious, harder to track

Name the century.

The head of a monopoly gets caught attempting to undermine the political process with illicit donations, but is let off by an impotent regulator.

An inner-city developer makes campaign contributions and gets approval — and millions in government funding — to rebuild a storm-damaged development in exactly the same location.

State officials award a massive project and the party in power receives numerous donations from people involved.

Legislators change campaign finance laws so they can legally launder money between sources, while retaining all of the rules and regulations that make their funding sources appear innocent.

The 19th century wouldn't be a bad guess, but the truth is all of these things are happening today. Much like the machine politics of centuries past, our government is compromised by its coziness with the elite and powerful. Maybe that's why citizens are disengaged and disgusted.

And especially young people. Young people, on average, have less access to wealth and power than citizens further along in their careers and social networks. Why sit down at the table before they can afford the minimum bet?

Unlike old-fashioned political corruption, the influence peddling of today is less brazen. In fact, the obscure nature of how power is bought and sold increases the danger. This means citizens can't hold their politicians accountable.

Of course, in some instances the federal government swoops in to keep state politicians honest. The FBI effectively ended the 2012 congressional campaign of former Speaker of the House Chris Donovan after his campaign staff attempted to trade legislative favors for campaign contributions. And more recently a jury convicted ex-Gov. John Rowland on charges he evaded campaign finance reporting laws.

Anyone giddy with the news of Rowland's latest conviction should be prepared to perform a citizen's arrest on Thomas May, the CEO of Northeast Utilities. May, a state contractor and the aforementioned monopolist who illegally tried to raise money for the sitting governor was let off by a nearly useless regulator, the State Elections Enforcement Commission.

(CL&P, part of May's company, recently asked for $221 million in rate increases including a 59 percent increase in monthly service charges. Those donations don't come cheap!)

The elections enforcement commission may fine, but it never destroys — unless of course the offender is a powerless average citizen. The commission called May's scheme "offensive" and "egregious" but not illegal.

This ruling deserves no respect.

May put himself under the microscope by sending an email to executives at his company asking them to contribute money to the Democratic Party's federal account to support Gov. Dannel Malloy.

"I am asking each of you to join me in financially supporting Connecticut's Governor Dannel P. Malloy," May wrote in an email to about 50 subordinates a year ago.

Connecticut law says state contractors like May cannot "knowingly solicit contributions" for candidates for governor. If his email didn't break the law, it's much like the case of a 19-year-old who sells a dime bag to an undercover cop only to learn it was oregano. He sure tried his best.

Either May believed he was raising money for Malloy, in which case he broke the law, or he didn't, in which case he lied to his employees. Neither answer inspires trust.

If this were just an article in The Onion — suggested headline "Shock: Rich and powerful help each other stay that way" — maybe I could laugh. Instead I am angry. Indeed, it's more like a chapter from "1984." State contractors can't donate to campaigns, but they can donate to parties, specifically to their "federal accounts."

What's a federal account? It's designed to allow state parties to raise money under federal rules for federal races. In many states, the federal rules are stricter than the state rules. In Connecticut the rules are similar, except the federal rules don't prohibit anyone from donating, while the state bans donations from contractors.

Someone cracked the code. Get the contractors to give to the federal account and use that money to support state candidates.

In the end, the entire ethics and good government system implemented after the original Rowland scandal is all about appearances, nothing more than Febreze for dirty politics.

Zachary Janowski of the Plantsville section of Southington is an investigative reporter at the Yankee Institute For Public Policy. He is a visiting member of The Courant's editorial board.